Supreme Court Lifts Suppression Order on Identity of Sniper Who Killed Bikie Leader Nick Martin

Introduction

The Supreme Court of Western Australia has lifted a suppression order that previously prevented the media from publishing the name of Benjamin Luke Johnston, the man convicted of murdering former Rebels Motorcycle Club president Nick Martin at the Perth Motorplex in 2020. The order was removed on April 24, 2026, after Johnston requested it.

Main Body

Benjamin Luke Johnston, a 39-year-old former Australian Army reservist and ex-FIFO electrician, pleaded guilty to the murder of Nick Martin. He is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence at an undisclosed high-security facility. The killing occurred on December 12, 2020, at the Kwinana Motorplex. Johnston fired a single shot from a .308-calibre rifle at a distance of 365 meters, striking Martin in the chest. The bullet passed through the victim and hit Martin''s son-in-law, Ricky Chapman, in the arm. Chapman survived the incident but died 16 months later from an unrelated medical condition. Approximately 2,000 people were present at the event. Johnston''s testimony was crucial in the later trial of David James Pye, a former associate of Martin who had switched to the Comancheros Motorcycle Club. Pye was found guilty of planning the murder and encouraging Johnston to kill another rival, Ray Cilli. Johnston testified that Pye offered him $150,000 for the murder of Martin, although he was ultimately paid $100,000. Pye is scheduled for sentencing on May 13, 2026, and his lawyer, Paul Holmes, has stated that he intends to appeal the conviction. In his request to lift the suppression order, Johnston argued that the anonymity order was negatively affecting his life in prison. He claimed that mail was not reaching him, that visitors had difficulty booking appointments, and that the order prevented him from enrolling in a university health and science degree, which required using his legal name. He also stated that he had no fears for his safety, as the prison population already knew who he was. Justice Joseph McGrath, who handled the application, decided that the potential risk to a future retrial was not a strong enough reason to keep the order in place, and he granted the request. Previously hidden details of Johnston''s background have also been released. He served as an artillery gunner in the Australian Army Reserve and started shooting air rifles in his mid-teens. He held a gun license and kept multiple weapons at his home in Waikiki. Johnston worked for the charity Shadows of Hope in Iraq and Kurdistan, where he provided medical training and security advice. He was treated for post-traumatic stress disorder and sought the drug MDMA, which, according to court testimony, led to his first contact with Pye. During Pye''s trial, Johnston described carrying out extensive surveillance on Martin, including using a drone to check the security of Martin''s home and testing his rifle by firing 200 rounds at a target in remote bushland. On the night of the murder, he entered the venue through a hole in a fence, wore camouflage, and waited in a vegetated area for 10 to 15 minutes before firing. Pye''s defense lawyer described Johnston as a pathological and compulsive liar during the trial, pointing out that cross-examination revealed exaggerations and false claims about his past. The defense also argued that no direct evidence, apart from Johnston''s testimony, connected Pye to the murder, and that police recordings of conversations between the two men did not clearly discuss the killing. The prosecution, however, argued that Pye had a clear motive, which came from his move from the Rebels to the Comancheros and a mutual desire for the other''s death. The trial was held without a jury, as the court decided that an impartial jury could not be selected.

Conclusion

The lifting of the suppression order now allows the public to know that Benjamin Luke Johnston is the person who fatally shot Nick Martin. Johnston remains in prison, and David Pye is waiting to be sentenced for his role in the murder, with an appeal of his conviction expected.

Vocabulary Learning

anonymity order
A court order that keeps a person's identity secret from the public.匿名令:一項法院命令,用於對公眾隱瞞某人的身份。
Example:Johnston requested the removal of the anonymity order because it was affecting his prison life.
appeal the conviction
To formally ask a higher court to change or overturn a guilty verdict.對定罪提出上訴:正式請求更高級別的法院更改或推翻有罪判決。
Example:Pye's lawyer stated that he intends to appeal the conviction after sentencing.
cross-examination
The questioning of a witness by the opposing legal team in a trial.盤問:在審判中由對方律師對證人進行的提問。
Example:During cross-examination, the defense lawyer revealed inconsistencies in Johnston's testimony.
pleaded guilty
Formally admitted to committing a crime in a court of law.認罪:在法庭上正式承認犯罪。
Example:Benjamin Luke Johnston pleaded guilty to the murder of Nick Martin.
suppression order
A legal order that prevents the publication or disclosure of certain information.禁止發布令:一項禁止發布或披露特定信息的法律命令。
Example:The Supreme Court lifted the suppression order, allowing the media to name the convicted sniper.

Sentence Learning

The Supreme Court of Western Australia has lifted a suppression order that previously prevented the media from publishing the name of Benjamin Luke Johnston, the man convicted of murdering former Rebels Motorcycle Club president Nick Martin at the Perth Motorplex in 2020.
This sentence uses a relative clause ('that previously prevented...') to define the suppression order, and a noun phrase in apposition ('the man convicted...') to give extra information about Johnston. This structure helps organize complex information clearly.這個句子使用關係從句(「that previously prevented...」)來定義禁制令,並使用同位語名詞短語(「the man convicted...」)來補充約翰斯頓的資料。這種結構有助於清晰地組織複雜資訊。
The order was removed on April 24, 2026, after Johnston requested it.
This sentence uses the passive voice ('was removed') to focus on the action (the removal of the order) rather than who removed it, which is common in formal reporting. The linking word 'after' shows the sequence of events.這個句子使用被動語態(「was removed」)來強調動作(禁制令被解除)而非執行者,這在正式報導中很常見。連接詞「after」顯示事件發生的先後順序。
Johnston testified that Pye offered him $150,000 for the murder of Martin, although he was ultimately paid $100,000.
This sentence uses 'although' to show contrast between the offered amount and the paid amount. The structure 'testified that...' introduces reported speech, making the reporting clear and logical.這個句子使用「although」來對比提議的金額和實際支付的金額。「testified that...」的結構引入間接引語,使報導清晰且有邏輯。
He claimed that mail was not reaching him, that visitors had difficulty booking appointments, and that the order prevented him from enrolling in a university health and science degree, which required using his legal name.
This sentence uses parallel structure with three 'that' clauses to list Johnston's claims clearly. It also includes a non-defining relative clause ('which required...') to add extra detail about the degree. This helps organize multiple reasons in a logical way.這個句子使用三個「that」從句的平行結構來清晰地列出約翰斯頓的主張。它還包含一個非限制性關係從句(「which required...」)來補充關於該學位的額外細節。這有助於以邏輯方式組織多個理由。
Justice Joseph McGrath, who handled the application, decided that the potential risk to a future retrial was not a strong enough reason to keep the order in place, and he granted the request.
This sentence uses a non-defining relative clause ('who handled the application') to identify Justice McGrath. It then uses 'that' to introduce the decision and 'and' to connect the decision with the action taken. This structure clearly shows who did what and why.這個句子使用非限制性關係從句(「who handled the application」)來說明麥格拉斯法官的身份。然後使用「that」引入決定,並用「and」連接決定與採取的行動。這種結構清楚地顯示了誰做了什麼以及原因。